Ukraine

[Daehawk]

looks pretty primitive..standard Russian crap.

[Jaymann]

With that kind of investment you'd think they would at least put a Club across the steering wheel.

[Holman]

With that kind of investment you'd think they would at least put a Club across the steering wheel.

Western tanks have a thermite grenade for this purpose.

[malchior]

Ugh. This is getting dangerous. They probably want to declare this territory -- that they definitely can't hold -- as Russian ground immediately. No one is going to recognize this but it could be part of a major escalation.

[El Guapo]

I don't totally get what Russia achieves through these referenda. No one's going to respect the results. Maybe it's meant as a statement of resolve - i.e. even though this is going badly for us now, don't expect us to give up or fold anytime soon?

[malchior]

I don't totally get what Russia achieves through these referenda. No one's going to respect the results. Maybe it's meant as a statement of resolve - i.e. even though this is going badly for us now, don't expect us to give up or fold anytime soon?

They might spin it as resolve but it's ultimately about the implied threat. They may want to draw a red line in the sand with non-conventional weapons on the other side of it. In any case, this is more evidence that the Russian military is crumbling. This morning the UK signaled that Russian nuclear submarines were observed leaving Sevastopol for instance. This is a panicked response. At one point they had 'cancelled' the referendum in the faces of losses. Now they are saying that was unrelated and they wanted to move up the timetable because victory. It's all the usual Russian lying and bullshit but they are still a very dangerous nation.

Edit: I just remembered as well that Putin early on essentially deployed a nuclear shield against counterattack. At the beginning of 'the special military operation' he changed the status of their nuclear armament. This was fairly meaningless in practical sense but was meant to convey a threat. Now they are on the other side of something they couldn't foresee - complete disaster.

[LawBeefaroni]

If they become part of Russia via the referendums then any attempt to take back the territory is spun as an attack on Russian sovereignty. No one but Russia will recognize but it gives Putin more options internally.

[Newcastle]

From Bloomberg:

In Moscow, officials said they’d grant the regions’ requests to be annexed if they made them. Former President Dmitry Medvedev, who’s now deputy head of the Security Council, said the annexation would be “irreversible” and enable Russia to use “all possible force in self-defense” in the newly-acquired territory.

The move threatens to escalate the bloody conflict even further, potentially giving President Vladimir Putin the formal legal basis to use nuclear weapons to defend what Moscow would consider Russian territory. Annexation, even though it’s sure to be rejected internationally, would likely torpedo any future peace talks, as Russia has said it won’t cede territory it considers its own while Kyiv has refused to give up any land taken by Moscow.

I think Lawbeefaroni is right. It gives Russia a pretext to go bigger in terms of their "self defense". This could lead to a dangerous path, because self defense could include that-which-shall-not-be-named [ie the mushroom cloud]. If Ukraine enters those areas, then Russia is well within their right to use any means necessary to repel the invaders.

Is anyone seeing chatter about Putin's speech tonight? Heard something about a mass mobilization, but not through verifiable news sources.

[LawBeefaroni]

The Duma hastily passed a law with 10 year sentences for retreat-ers and 15 years for anyone who surrenders to Ukraine forces (IIRC).

They are trying to avoid mass conscription but moving from Special Military Operation to Defense of Motherland gets them closer. Their fall conscript class is at the end of this month, we'll see how it goes.

Right now the press gangs and Wagoner group prison recruiting aren't going well.

And winter isn't that far off. If it's hard to get Russians to sit in trenches or freezing APC now when they have little food and shitty weapons, imagine what it will be like when you throw frostbite into the mix. Plus winter gear is a whole different level of logistics.

[LordMortis]

I think Lawbeefaroni is right. It gives Russia a pretext to go bigger in terms of their "self defense". Stand Your Ground

[malchior]

And winter isn't that far off. If it's hard to get Russians to sit in trenches or freezing APC now when they have little food and shitty weapons, imagine what it will be like when you throw frostbite into the mix. Plus winter gear is a whole different level of logistics.

Considering the scale of their meltdown we might wonder if Putin makes it to/through the winter. It not likely but this situation is not favorable for him at all.

[Carpet_pissr]

I think Lawbeefaroni is right. It gives Russia a pretext to go bigger in terms of their "self defense". Stand Your Ground

Well played

[Apollo]

With both India and China now pressuring Russia to end this war (though how MUCH pressure they are applying behind the scenes remains a mystery) along with the usual suspects, I would be surprised to see Russia escalate to Nuclear weapons if Ukraine basically attacks their own territory in an attempt to regain it. Not only would it make Russia look desperate, since everyone knows the annexed territory is not theirs, it will definitely cause even greater isolation for them, and it might cause trouble for Putin internally as well. I think the whole thing is a desperate bluff and I don't think the Ukrainians will hesitate to attack the territories regardless of bogus referendums. On the other hand, it will definitely make everyone even more nervous than they already are about this war.

[Holman]

Declaring contested territory to be Russian rather than Ukrainian changes nothing on the battlefield, but it likely provides Russia with justification for further repressions at home. At the stroke of a pen, the war becomes "defensive" rather than "offensive," and this likely makes it easier to censor/arrest domestic critics of Putin and the Russian military.

There's still a pretense of civil society to be upheld, after all.

[Carpet_pissr]

One of the things I think Biden got right the other night on 60 Minutes was his response to "what if an increasingly desperate Russia uses chemical weapons or tactical nukes?" After a semi-weird "Don't! (insert 8 second pause) Don't!" moment, he correctly I think stated that that would pariah them even more than they are now.

But the real question is does a desperate Putin really care about that right now?

His Big Deal seemingly forever has been that Soviet pride - that the world RESPECT them, and view them as the superpower they once were. Now that that facade is falling apart, he might think "welp, the game is up, I will do whatever it takes to at least "win", locally/here in this war." It turns into vengeance at some point, punishing them for making him look foolish and weak.

I know Ukraine is not interested in letting him have an inch, but I also wonder if the smarter strategy involves somehow letting Putin save a little face here...give him SOME kind of acceptable out.

[Isgrimnur]

I'm sure there's a ditch and some petrol somewhere nearby.

[Grifman]

I don't totally get what Russia achieves through these referenda. No one's going to respect the results. Maybe it's meant as a statement of resolve - i.e. even though this is going badly for us now, don't expect us to give up or fold anytime soon?

Since these territories are now "Russian", conscripts can be deployed to them, bolstering their forces. Conscripts can't be deployed overseas. This is just a hidden mobilization, among other things.

[Kraken]

I don't totally get what Russia achieves through these referenda. No one's going to respect the results. Maybe it's meant as a statement of resolve - i.e. even though this is going badly for us now, don't expect us to give up or fold anytime soon?

Y'know how Ukraine is respecting Russia's border? AFAIK they haven't lobbed a single artillery shell or missile into Russia. Annexing territory extends Russia's borders, at least fictionally, and with them that potential tripwire. If Ukraine decides that Crimea is in play, how would Russia respond to incursions there? In Putin's mind, these new territories will be in the same category as Crimea.

[El Guapo]

I don't totally get what Russia achieves through these referenda. No one's going to respect the results. Maybe it's meant as a statement of resolve - i.e. even though this is going badly for us now, don't expect us to give up or fold anytime soon?

Y'know how Ukraine is respecting Russia's border? AFAIK they haven't lobbed a single artillery shell or missile into Russia. Annexing territory extends Russia's borders, at least fictionally, and with them that potential tripwire. If Ukraine decides that Crimea is in play, how would Russia respond to incursions there? In Putin's mind, these new territories will be in the same category as Crimea.

FWIW Ukraine has already said that Crimea is in play - their position is that the war only ends when Ukraine is restored to its pre-2014 borders.

[Kraken]

I don't totally get what Russia achieves through these referenda. No one's going to respect the results. Maybe it's meant as a statement of resolve - i.e. even though this is going badly for us now, don't expect us to give up or fold anytime soon?

Y'know how Ukraine is respecting Russia's border? AFAIK they haven't lobbed a single artillery shell or missile into Russia. Annexing territory extends Russia's borders, at least fictionally, and with them that potential tripwire. If Ukraine decides that Crimea is in play, how would Russia respond to incursions there? In Putin's mind, these new territories will be in the same category as Crimea.

FWIW Ukraine has already said that Crimea is in play - their position is that the war only ends when Ukraine is restored to its pre-2014 borders.

Has Ukraine attacked Crimea yet, or is that still bluster?

[Victoria Raverna]

I don't totally get what Russia achieves through these referenda. No one's going to respect the results. Maybe it's meant as a statement of resolve - i.e. even though this is going badly for us now, don't expect us to give up or fold anytime soon?

Y'know how Ukraine is respecting Russia's border? AFAIK they haven't lobbed a single artillery shell or missile into Russia. Annexing territory extends Russia's borders, at least fictionally, and with them that potential tripwire. If Ukraine decides that Crimea is in play, how would Russia respond to incursions there? In Putin's mind, these new territories will be in the same category as Crimea.

FWIW Ukraine has already said that Crimea is in play - their position is that the war only ends when Ukraine is restored to its pre-2014 borders.

Has Ukraine attacked Crimea yet, or is that still bluster?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62608526

Explosions at the Saki airbase on 9 August and other assaults have put more than half of the Black Sea fleet's naval jets out of action, they said.
The fleet has a revered history, but it has suffered a series of humiliations since the invasion began in February.
Officials said the setbacks have forced it to adopt a defensive posture.
In April, the fleet's flagship, the cruiser Moskva, was sunk by Ukraine. The 510-crew missile cruiser had led Russia's naval assault on Ukraine, and its sinking was a major symbolic and military blow.
At the time, the Russian defence ministry said ammunition on board the Moskva exploded in an unexplained fire, and the ship tipped over while being towed back to port.
In June, the fleet suffered another embarrassment when it was forced to abandon Snake Island, a tiny outpost in the north-west of the Black Sea seized by Russia on the first day of its invasion, after coming under sustained Ukrainian bombardment.
And in recent weeks, the fleet's home in the Crimean peninsula, which Russia annexed in 2014, has come under attack from Ukrainian forces.
At least eight fighter jets were destroyed in the bombardment of Saki airbase on 9 August.
Following the attacks, scores of holidaymakers were seen fleeing the peninsula, which was previously untouched by fighting. Images acquired by the BBC showed queues of traffic on roads leading out of Crimea three days after the attack.
The 9 August strikes were not the only apparent Ukrainian strikes in Crimea.
In July, Russian officials alleged that a Ukrainian drone attack forced an end to Navy Day celebrations in Sevastopol, and on 16 August there were explosions at an arms depot on the peninsula.

[Kraken]

Those are partisans or special ops, not direct Ukrainian army assaults, right? Has Ukraine openly attacked Russian-claimed territory yet?

[El Guapo]

Those are partisans or special ops, not direct Ukrainian army assaults, right? Has Ukraine openly attacked Russian-claimed territory yet?

I don't think that there is fighting in Crimea, at least not yet. But I think there's zero reason to doubt that Ukraine is serious when they say that they are fighting for Crimea as well as eastern Ukraine, and that they will advance into Crimea if and when they are able. After all Russia clearly claims the Ukrainian east already - the referenda is just changing a legal fiction as opposed to the reality of Russia's claims. So in truth they are already openly attacking Russian claimed territory when they counter-attack Russia in the east.

So why would they stop short of attacking Crimea if they are able? It's not like it would cost them any international support or legitimacy, since the international community still recognizes Crimea as part of Ukraine.

[malchior]

Those are partisans or special ops, not direct Ukrainian army assaults, right? Has Ukraine openly attacked Russian-claimed territory yet?

I don't think that there is fighting in Crimea, at least not yet. But I think there's zero reason to doubt that Ukraine is serious when they say that they are fighting for Crimea as well as eastern Ukraine, and that they will advance into Crimea if and when they are able. After all Russia clearly claims the Ukrainian east already - the referenda is just changing a legal fiction as opposed to the reality of Russia's claims. So in truth they are already openly attacking Russian claimed territory when they counter-attack Russia in the east.

So why would they stop short of attacking Crimea if they are able? It's not like it would cost them any international support or legitimacy, since the international community still recognizes Crimea as part of Ukraine.

The Ukrainian army has conducted direct Special Operations in Crimea. NY Times - Aug 16th

A senior Ukrainian official said that an elite military unit was responsible for the attack on an ammunition storage site, the latest to directly target the peninsula that holds special meaning for Russian President Vladimir Putin.

A series of brazen attacks on Russian-occupied Crimea by Ukraine in recent days — the latest on Tuesday by an elite military unit operating behind enemy lines — come in defiance of dire warnings of retaliation from Moscow. A senior Russian official vowed last month that if Ukraine attacked Crimea, it would immediately face “Judgment Day.”

The Black Sea peninsula, which Russia illegally seized in 2014, is more than a crucial military base and staging ground for its invasion of Ukraine. It holds special meaning for President Vladimir V. Putin, who has told his people that Crimea is a “sacred place” and Russia’s “holy land.” And by repeatedly striking at the territory, Ukraine has posed a fresh challenge to Mr. Putin’s standing at home.

On Tuesday, huge explosions rocked a Russian ammunition depot there, as Ukraine tries to counter Moscow’s advantages in matériel and disrupt supply lines by ratcheting up its military tactics and striking deep behind the front. Last week, blasts at a military airfield in Crimea sent beachgoers rushing for cover, and an attack by a makeshift drone in the port city of Sevastopol on July 31 forced Russia to cancel its Navy Day celebrations.

Ukraine hasn't publicly announced their strategy intentions as far as I know.

In other news, Putin spoke about 4 hours ago and the reasons for the law changes came into sharper focus. According to translations I read, he made a long rambling speech about NATO forcing this war, Ukraine is full of neo-Nazis and are a puppet of the west, peppered in the nuclear threats, blah blah blah, but more concretely he did announce a 'partial' mobilization and called any reservists and anyone who has previously served in combat. The Russians claim they'll pour 300K troops into the fight. They are however liars so that's probably bullshit and for all the reasons people have pointed out is probably not going to work anyway.

Unless people are going to mule artillery ammo (that doesn't exist) or drags barrels of oil (that do exist) to fuel front-line vehicles (that don't exist anymore) this doesn't really change the math. They might just dig earthworks and put lots of bodies behind them but...guess we'll see what happens but Putin is really, really desperate.

[malchior]

The response from the population...maybe panic? Too bad they don't have the appetite to do the right thing and hang Putin from a bridge or push him out a window.

[El Guapo]

The response from the population...maybe panic? Too bad they don't have the appetite to do the right thing and hang Putin from a bridge or push him out a window.

To be fair to the Russians...that's probably what I would do in their position too. Even if you want to be rid of Putin, the most likely outcome of doing something to stand up to him publicly is that you wind up in prison or dead. Unpopular repressive dictators often last for a long time specifically because it's so hard to oust them...everyone has to stick out their necks together at exactly the right time.

[El Guapo]

Those are partisans or special ops, not direct Ukrainian army assaults, right? Has Ukraine openly attacked Russian-claimed territory yet?

I don't think that there is fighting in Crimea, at least not yet. But I think there's zero reason to doubt that Ukraine is serious when they say that they are fighting for Crimea as well as eastern Ukraine, and that they will advance into Crimea if and when they are able. After all Russia clearly claims the Ukrainian east already - the referenda is just changing a legal fiction as opposed to the reality of Russia's claims. So in truth they are already openly attacking Russian claimed territory when they counter-attack Russia in the east.

So why would they stop short of attacking Crimea if they are able? It's not like it would cost them any international support or legitimacy, since the international community still recognizes Crimea as part of Ukraine.

The Ukrainian army has conducted direct Special Operations in Crimea. NY Times - Aug 16th

A senior Ukrainian official said that an elite military unit was responsible for the attack on an ammunition storage site, the latest to directly target the peninsula that holds special meaning for Russian President Vladimir Putin.

A series of brazen attacks on Russian-occupied Crimea by Ukraine in recent days — the latest on Tuesday by an elite military unit operating behind enemy lines — come in defiance of dire warnings of retaliation from Moscow. A senior Russian official vowed last month that if Ukraine attacked Crimea, it would immediately face “Judgment Day.”

The Black Sea peninsula, which Russia illegally seized in 2014, is more than a crucial military base and staging ground for its invasion of Ukraine. It holds special meaning for President Vladimir V. Putin, who has told his people that Crimea is a “sacred place” and Russia’s “holy land.” And by repeatedly striking at the territory, Ukraine has posed a fresh challenge to Mr. Putin’s standing at home.

On Tuesday, huge explosions rocked a Russian ammunition depot there, as Ukraine tries to counter Moscow’s advantages in matériel and disrupt supply lines by ratcheting up its military tactics and striking deep behind the front. Last week, blasts at a military airfield in Crimea sent beachgoers rushing for cover, and an attack by a makeshift drone in the port city of Sevastopol on July 31 forced Russia to cancel its Navy Day celebrations.

Ukraine hasn't publicly announced their strategy intentions as far as I know.

Ukrainian leadership has repeatedly said things like The "war in Ukraine began with Crimea and must end with its liberation."

They haven't publicly said anything about if or when they would launch an offensive directed at Crimea, because that would be stupid. But I don't think there's any reason to doubt that they would attack Crimea if and when they saw a good opportunity to do so.

[malchior]

That's essentially what I was getting at. They aren't saying things like Crimea by Christmas, they aren't setting deadlines/mileposts, but in the grand sense they've been saying they want pre-2014 since the little green men appeared in the first place.

[LawBeefaroni]

The response from the population...maybe panic? Too bad they don't have the appetite to do the right thing and hang Putin from a bridge or push him out a window.

To be fair to the Russians...that's probably what I would do in their position too. Even if you want to be rid of Putin, the most likely outcome of doing something to stand up to him publicly is that you wind up in prison or dead. Unpopular repressive dictators often last for a long time specifically because it's so hard to oust them...everyone has to stick out their necks together at exactly the right time.

Plus, what he needs to execute this war is manpower. If you deprive him of that by fleeing, so much the better. Granted this means that the burden will fall even more on the poor who can't get those flights the fuck out of Dodge.

[malchior]

The response from the population...maybe panic? Too bad they don't have the appetite to do the right thing and hang Putin from a bridge or push him out a window.

To be fair to the Russians...that's probably what I would do in their position too. Even if you want to be rid of Putin, the most likely outcome of doing something to stand up to him publicly is that you wind up in prison or dead. Unpopular repressive dictators often last for a long time specifically because it's so hard to oust them...everyone has to stick out their necks together at exactly the right time.

Plus, what he needs to execute this war is manpower. If you deprive him of that by fleeing, so much the better. Granted this means that the burden will fall even more on the poor who can't get those flights the fuck out of Dodge.

Yeah it's all good. That wasn't a judgement on the Russian people. Talk about a culture that has been fucked by its leadership for centuries. They are a nation that are all essentially the descendants of a system of slavery that ended only a few years before our version ended. And that was a good chunk of their population. It has had profound impacts. I was just musing about the easy button because the risks are so high and it's mostly because of one another petty shitty monsters in a line of monsters. I'd love to see them finally signal to the world they are done with monsters.

[LawBeefaroni]

And I don't think that it's great that only the rich get an escape pod. They helped create the mess. But whatever hurts his efforts is a positive as far as I'm concerned. The war usually has to be deemed unwinnable before the pitchforks and gallows start coming out.

[Kraken]

Those are partisans or special ops, not direct Ukrainian army assaults, right? Has Ukraine openly attacked Russian-claimed territory yet?

I don't think that there is fighting in Crimea, at least not yet. But I think there's zero reason to doubt that Ukraine is serious when they say that they are fighting for Crimea as well as eastern Ukraine, and that they will advance into Crimea if and when they are able. After all Russia clearly claims the Ukrainian east already - the referenda is just changing a legal fiction as opposed to the reality of Russia's claims. So in truth they are already openly attacking Russian claimed territory when they counter-attack Russia in the east.

So why would they stop short of attacking Crimea if they are able? It's not like it would cost them any international support or legitimacy, since the international community still recognizes Crimea as part of Ukraine.

The Ukrainian army has conducted direct Special Operations in Crimea. NY Times - Aug 16th

A senior Ukrainian official said that an elite military unit was responsible for the attack on an ammunition storage site, the latest to directly target the peninsula that holds special meaning for Russian President Vladimir Putin.

A series of brazen attacks on Russian-occupied Crimea by Ukraine in recent days — the latest on Tuesday by an elite military unit operating behind enemy lines — come in defiance of dire warnings of retaliation from Moscow. A senior Russian official vowed last month that if Ukraine attacked Crimea, it would immediately face “Judgment Day.”

The Black Sea peninsula, which Russia illegally seized in 2014, is more than a crucial military base and staging ground for its invasion of Ukraine. It holds special meaning for President Vladimir V. Putin, who has told his people that Crimea is a “sacred place” and Russia’s “holy land.” And by repeatedly striking at the territory, Ukraine has posed a fresh challenge to Mr. Putin’s standing at home.

On Tuesday, huge explosions rocked a Russian ammunition depot there, as Ukraine tries to counter Moscow’s advantages in matériel and disrupt supply lines by ratcheting up its military tactics and striking deep behind the front. Last week, blasts at a military airfield in Crimea sent beachgoers rushing for cover, and an attack by a makeshift drone in the port city of Sevastopol on July 31 forced Russia to cancel its Navy Day celebrations.

Ukraine hasn't publicly announced their strategy intentions as far as I know.

Ukrainian leadership has repeatedly said things like The "war in Ukraine began with Crimea and must end with its liberation."

They haven't publicly said anything about if or when they would launch an offensive directed at Crimea, because that would be stupid. But I don't think there's any reason to doubt that they would attack Crimea if and when they saw a good opportunity to do so.

As they should do, militarily and morally. The 100-megaton question is how Putin would react to an incursion on what he believes is Russian soil. Unlike the territories he's about to annex with bogus referenda, Crimea has been swallowed and digested.

[El Guapo]

Those are partisans or special ops, not direct Ukrainian army assaults, right? Has Ukraine openly attacked Russian-claimed territory yet?

I don't think that there is fighting in Crimea, at least not yet. But I think there's zero reason to doubt that Ukraine is serious when they say that they are fighting for Crimea as well as eastern Ukraine, and that they will advance into Crimea if and when they are able. After all Russia clearly claims the Ukrainian east already - the referenda is just changing a legal fiction as opposed to the reality of Russia's claims. So in truth they are already openly attacking Russian claimed territory when they counter-attack Russia in the east.

So why would they stop short of attacking Crimea if they are able? It's not like it would cost them any international support or legitimacy, since the international community still recognizes Crimea as part of Ukraine.

The Ukrainian army has conducted direct Special Operations in Crimea. NY Times - Aug 16th

A senior Ukrainian official said that an elite military unit was responsible for the attack on an ammunition storage site, the latest to directly target the peninsula that holds special meaning for Russian President Vladimir Putin.

A series of brazen attacks on Russian-occupied Crimea by Ukraine in recent days — the latest on Tuesday by an elite military unit operating behind enemy lines — come in defiance of dire warnings of retaliation from Moscow. A senior Russian official vowed last month that if Ukraine attacked Crimea, it would immediately face “Judgment Day.”

The Black Sea peninsula, which Russia illegally seized in 2014, is more than a crucial military base and staging ground for its invasion of Ukraine. It holds special meaning for President Vladimir V. Putin, who has told his people that Crimea is a “sacred place” and Russia’s “holy land.” And by repeatedly striking at the territory, Ukraine has posed a fresh challenge to Mr. Putin’s standing at home.

On Tuesday, huge explosions rocked a Russian ammunition depot there, as Ukraine tries to counter Moscow’s advantages in matériel and disrupt supply lines by ratcheting up its military tactics and striking deep behind the front. Last week, blasts at a military airfield in Crimea sent beachgoers rushing for cover, and an attack by a makeshift drone in the port city of Sevastopol on July 31 forced Russia to cancel its Navy Day celebrations.

Ukraine hasn't publicly announced their strategy intentions as far as I know.

Ukrainian leadership has repeatedly said things like The "war in Ukraine began with Crimea and must end with its liberation."

They haven't publicly said anything about if or when they would launch an offensive directed at Crimea, because that would be stupid. But I don't think there's any reason to doubt that they would attack Crimea if and when they saw a good opportunity to do so.

As they should do, militarily and morally. The 100-megaton question is how Putin would react to an incursion on what he believes is Russian soil. Unlike the territories he's about to annex with bogus referenda, Crimea has been swallowed and digested.

As a matter of ideology and personal belief, I don't think that he would distinguish between Crimea and the Donbas. That's all part of Russia as far as Putin is concerned - for that matter, it's pretty clear that he thinks of Kiev and pretty much all of Ukraine (except *maybe* the far western parts that were governed by Austria for a long time) to be part of Russia.

However, starting this war and winding up with *less* territory than he started with would be impossible to sell to the domestic population as any kind of victory, even with the advantages of state-dominated media. Even going back to the pre-2022 status quo ante (and holding onto Crimea) would itself be pretty humiliating. But I imagine that losing Crimea on top of that would make Putin very worried about domestic unrest.

[raydude]

What was that about losing Crimea? It could be possible, if one looks at ATACMS, logistics, and railways and how they relate to the Russian supply chain.

[Kurth]

What was that about losing Crimea? It could be possible, if one looks at ATACMS, logistics, and railways and how they relate to the Russian supply chain.

That’s a really interesting thread. Seems like it’s the whole HIMARS/GLRMS debate all over again. Let’s see if we can go 2/2 and make the right decision again.

[malchior]

What was that about losing Crimea? It could be possible, if one looks at ATACMS, logistics, and railways and how they relate to the Russian supply chain.

That’s a really interesting thread. Seems like it’s the whole HIMARS/GLRMS debate all over again. Let’s see if we can go 2/2 and make the right decision again.

People have been advocating for ATACMS since before we gave them HIMARS. The same arguments against still apply and are worsened now that Ukraine has made significant progress. Edit: To be clearer I actually think the main problem is that the tech in an ATACMS is probably the hang up. HIMARS is terminally guided. You aim it and fire. ATACMS uses smart warheads with GPS guided munitions. We could be worried about the risk of the technology being captured.

Still, providing them would probably hasten the end of the conflict but at a risk. US intelligence has shown it had good insight into Russian thinking in the run up. If it still exists I'm sure they have or are weighing all that in the math to make a call.

[El Guapo]

What was that about losing Crimea? It could be possible, if one looks at ATACMS, logistics, and railways and how they relate to the Russian supply chain.

That’s a really interesting thread. Seems like it’s the whole HIMARS/GLRMS debate all over again. Let’s see if we can go 2/2 and make the right decision again.

People have been advocating for ATACMS since before we gave them HIMARS. The same arguments against still apply and are worsened now that Ukraine has made significant progress. Edit: To be clearer I actually think the main problem is that the tech in an ATACMS is probably the hang up. HIMARS is terminally guided. You aim it and fire. ATACMS uses smart warheads with GPS guided munitions. We could be worried about the risk of the technology being captured.

Still, providing them would probably hasten the end of the conflict but at a risk. US intelligence has shown it had good insight into Russian thinking in the run up. If it still exists I'm sure they have or are weighing all that in the math to make a call.

I guess the question is what kind of a difference (if any) will Russia's partial mobilization make on the battlefield? The sense I get as an amateur here is that most of the experts don't expect it to turn the tide in Russia's favor by itself, but it has to make some difference even if the troops that they get suck, right?

What's also semi-funny is that Ukraine has to balance the international PR around their battlefield situation kind of delicately. They don't want to present too pessimistic a picture in order to avoid the international community saying "well, it's hopeless, no point in giving Ukraine further advanced weapons". But they also don't want to present too optimistic a picture so that the international community says "well no need to give them our best stuff because they're already winning". I imagine that they're more worried about the latter than the former right now, so I wonder whether they'll try to be a little more pessimistic in their international messaging in the near term.

[LawBeefaroni]

Protests in Moscow and St Petersburg today have grown pretty large. People chanting “No to War!” Dozens of arrests reported [w/ video]

[El Guapo]

Well, I suppose that's the reason that Putin has resisted any sort of mobilization up to now. People are worried first and foremost about their own families. As long as they're not touched by the war, then they have a lot to lose by challenging Putin. Once the government starts pushing their sons to fight in the war, putting their lives at risk, then all of the sudden they have less to lose by challenging the government.

[raydude]

What was that about losing Crimea? It could be possible, if one looks at ATACMS, logistics, and railways and how they relate to the Russian supply chain.

That’s a really interesting thread. Seems like it’s the whole HIMARS/GLRMS debate all over again. Let’s see if we can go 2/2 and make the right decision again.

People have been advocating for ATACMS since before we gave them HIMARS. The same arguments against still apply and are worsened now that Ukraine has made significant progress. Edit: To be clearer I actually think the main problem is that the tech in an ATACMS is probably the hang up. HIMARS is terminally guided. You aim it and fire. ATACMS uses smart warheads with GPS guided munitions. We could be worried about the risk of the technology being captured.

Still, providing them would probably hasten the end of the conflict but at a risk. US intelligence has shown it had good insight into Russian thinking in the run up. If it still exists I'm sure they have or are weighing all that in the math to make a call.

I guess the question is what kind of a difference (if any) will Russia's partial mobilization make on the battlefield? The sense I get as an amateur here is that most of the experts don't expect it to turn the tide in Russia's favor by itself, but it has to make some difference even if the troops that they get suck, right?

One needs to ask "What can we reasonably expect new Russian recruits to know, what does it take to train them and how long would it take to train them?"

At the bare minimum, they need a training facility with officers and a professional NCO corps to train them. We already know Russia doesn't have a professional NCO corps - everything is run by the officers. Do they have officers that can train them? Maybe. Are they any good? I think not - I think the good ones were shipped off to Ukraine and possibly died there or got out at the end of their term if they were lucky.

We know Russia has training facilities, but are they big enough to handle an influx of 300,000 new recruits? I would say no. I don't think even the US can go from zero to 300,000 with the facilities we have.

Then there is the length of training time. In the US a new recruit has 3 months of basic training followed by 3 months of advanced individual training. That's 6 months before the 300,000 new recruits have the bare minimum to move and fight as a unit. And that's without additional training in tanks or artillery, or even supply and logistics. And that doesn't count getting integrated into an existing unit or forming into a new unit. Does Russia have 6 months to spare? I'm thinking not - it will be winter by that time.

So let's say Russia cuts corners and gives the new recruits barely 3 weeks of training with inadequate officers and facilities and uses them to fill gaps in existing units. Now you have a bunch of warm bodies who maybe know how to shoot a rifle. Stick them in a trench and wait for them to get pounded by artillery, and armor, and get outmaneuvered by a highly mobile Ukrainian force? Because that's probably what will happen.